Author
Topic: [ANN][SIM] Simcoin - A Simple Coin (Read 62853 times)

You won't take $20 for the house worth 200 K, so you have no right to demand 2 M for it too.

I absolutely HAVE the right to demand 2M for my 200k house. It's my house. I paid with MY money. So I can ask whatever I want.

Again. There was a plan laid out by you to attract investors 4 years ago.You'd build a cryptocurrency with a defined set of features.You would decide the end date of this ICO without prior notice.The funds raised would equal 40% of the total supply of your new coin.40% investors, 60% you.

It was a simple plan.Now you alter your plan to the disadvantage of your financial backers.

I absolutely HAVE the right to demand 2M for my 200k house. It's my house.

Of course. You can demand whatever you want, but nobody has to oblige your misguided demands.

Misguided? We gave you our money on the terms you created. Now you fuck over your investors because you just want so. There's no way anyone in the future would deal with someone like you who change his mind and dilute people's share 1000 times.

Again. There was a plan laid out by you to attract investors 4 years ago.

Plans change in response to new information. Not doing so is stupid.

That's just so fucked up. "Plans changed - bye bye suckers who gave me lots of money so I can leave my day job and work on my personal project. Now I'm gonna find new stupid fucks who will give me their money.".

Now you alter your plan to the disadvantage of your financial backers.

I have before me two conflicting interests:

1. the greed of investors who just want to dump to the next sucker and get rich2. the long term well-being and success of the whole project

Guess which one has a higher priority.

Nobody cares about your priority. Either you stick with the initial plan or your project is ruined anyway because no one will trust you in future.

NxtChg worked tirelessly on Simcoin for 4(!!) years with a relatively small budget. It is almost a miracle he didn't give up yet, even now it is clear that the initial plan was too ambitious. So what do you expect of him? Should he continue to try to realize the original idea, even if that doesn't make sense at all and will probably result in failure? Or maybe he should just quit and vanish into thin air? In both cases you will lose your investment.

But no, he chooses to continue on a new path because he still thinks the world needs something like Simcoin. He wants to learn from past mistakes and make something better. And even though he owes us nothing anymore because the original experiment we invested in failed, he still tries to give the original investors something in return. Who does that?? Just take a look at http://deadcoins.com. Do you think all those initiatives compensated their investors once they failed? No, they just took the money and ran. Why? Because they are like you. Just think about that.

Now you alter your plan to the disadvantage of your financial backers.

I have before me two conflicting interests:

1. the greed of investors who just want to dump to the next sucker and get rich2. the long term well-being and success of the whole project

Guess which one has a higher priority.

Nobody cares about your priority. Either you stick with the initial plan or your project is ruined anyway because no one will trust you in future.

NxtChg worked tirelessly on Simcoin for 4(!!) years with a relatively small budget. It is almost a miracle he didn't give up yet, even now it is clear that the initial plan was too ambitious. So what do you expect of him? Should he continue to try to realize the original idea, even if that doesn't make sense at all and will probably result in failure? Or maybe he should just quit and vanish into thin air? In both cases you will lose your investment.

But no, he chooses to continue on a new path because he still thinks the world needs something like Simcoin. He wants to learn from past mistakes and make something better. And even though he owes us nothing anymore because the original experiment we invested in failed, he still tries to give the original investors something in return. Who does that?? Just take a look at http://deadcoins.com. Do you think all those initiatives compensated their investors once they failed? No, they just took the money and ran. Why? Because they are like you. Just think about that.

You don't think Sim will be dead born with 99.6% of supply locked and 10000% inflation a year?

Would you personally buy Sim after the release if you'd know that in a week its supply will be doubled? And after another week there will be released another billion coins and every single week for the next 10 years 1 billion coins will be flooding the market.

Let's say Overlord wants to control 99% of supply for some reason. Then why wouldn't he just lock most part of our 40% supply and release our coins gradually withing 3-5 years? That would make way more sense. I'd be totally fine with receiving 1% of my coins every week if he thinks it'd somehow help the project to succeed. But making 1000 time more coins out of nowhere and locking it is pure madness.

You don't think Sim will be dead born with 99.6% of supply locked and 10000% inflation a year?

Would you personally buy Sim after the release if you'd know that in a week its supply will be doubled? And after another week there will be released another billion coins and every single week for the next 10 years 1 billion coins will be flooding the market.

Let's say Overlord wants to control 99% of supply for some reason. Then why wouldn't he just lock most part of our 40% supply and release our coins gradually withing 3-5 years? That would make way more sense. I'd be totally fine with receiving 1% of my coins every week if he thinks it'd somehow help the project to succeed. But making 1000 time more coins out of nowhere and locking it is pure madness.

One idea, as I mentioned above, is to hard-code a release schedule from a locked account, and also add some form of voting for how and when to spend it. Splitting it between multiple "funds" with different purposes (i.e. marketing, development, etc.) is probably also a good idea.

I would like to hear other ideas.

He doesn't control 99% of the supply, the code does.

Maybe an idea is to release a part of the new coins to long-term hodlers and a smaller part to short-term hodlers? Like receiving interest from a bank?

You don't think Sim will be dead born with 99.6% of supply locked and 10000% inflation a year?

Would you personally buy Sim after the release if you'd know that in a week its supply will be doubled? And after another week there will be released another billion coins and every single week for the next 10 years 1 billion coins will be flooding the market.

Let's say Overlord wants to control 99% of supply for some reason. Then why wouldn't he just lock most part of our 40% supply and release our coins gradually withing 3-5 years? That would make way more sense. I'd be totally fine with receiving 1% of my coins every week if he thinks it'd somehow help the project to succeed. But making 1000 time more coins out of nowhere and locking it is pure madness.

One idea, as I mentioned above, is to hard-code a release schedule from a locked account, and also add some form of voting for how and when to spend it. Splitting it between multiple "funds" with different purposes (i.e. marketing, development, etc.) is probably also a good idea.

I would like to hear other ideas.

He doesn't control 99% of the supply, the code does.

Maybe an idea is to release a part of the new coins to long-term hodlers and a smaller part to short-term hodlers? Like receiving interest from a bank?

I suggested that long term holders should receive coins from that trillion coins but he said I'm a ponzi junk and spoiled by btc where you hold for a long time and become a millionaire.

Then why wouldn't he just lock most part of our 40% supply and release our coins gradually withing 3-5 years? That would make way more sense.

This actually would make sense. And this actually IS done in the startup world.You can't easily sell your equity whenever you please.

More, by releasing investors stakes over time, the risk of massive dumps to "the next sucker" is reduced a lot.

On another note, if the distribution is set in the code, how can volatility be reduced. And volatility compared to what? Will the price be pegged to another currency like USD. Even then, what API will you call to get your current price in USD to increase or reduce the circulation supply.

The initial 40/60 plan didn't even fail, and yet you want to change it.

bye bye suckers who gave me lots of money so I can leave my day job and work on my personal project.

Just to set the record straight, I quit my day job a decade earlier. And the $20 K / year Simcoin ICO brought hardly matches the salary of a senior developer.

So no, I don't work for you. I provide investment opportunity.

Quote

On another note, if the distribution is set in the code, how can volatility be reduced. And volatility compared to what? Will the price be pegged to another currency like USD. Even then, what API will you call to get your current price in USD to increase or reduce the circulation supply.

You all are freaking out like little girls without even considering HOW exactly the stake will be released.

In the end the release might as well end up being controlled by the stake voting, so you, the big investors, will decide when and how much to release, and can lock the whole trillion there forever. Yet you keep littering this thread with obscenities like uncivilized baboons.

How to smooth volatility is a good question and I am open to ideas.

The goal is not to completely remove it, but to do what central banks do with their currencies - buy when it hits the low threshold and sell when it hits the high threshold, maintaining a "corridor". Probably maintain a basket of other cryptocurrencies or USD.

It will probably be impossible to implement in code, though, so some entity will have to control it. It might be by stake voting, it might be the Simcoin Foundation, it might be a special fund of a few trusted people with multi-sig.

I expect most of that trillion will be locked up in this fund. Another great portion will be locked up in nodes. Since stake is power, another portion will be hoarded by people and companies. A few funds will be needed to fund development, marketing, etc.

On another note, if the distribution is set in the code, how can volatility be reduced. And volatility compared to what? Will the price be pegged to another currency like USD. Even then, what API will you call to get your current price in USD to increase or reduce the circulation supply.

You all are freaking out like little girls without even considering HOW exactly the stake will be released.

[...]

It will probably be impossible to implement in code, though, so some entity will have to control it.

I'm out. You accuse me of freaking out because i don't consider HOW distribution is done. The you continue by saying the HOW can't be coded into the coin.

How do you choose what market cap should Sim have? Let’s say Sim is released and traded at 50 satoshi, so its market cap is around 200 BTC. Then suddenly Coindesk notice it, publish an article and hundreds of people start buying Sim. What are you going to do? Release more and more new coins, dump them on newcomers in order to avoid volatility because you’re happy with 200 BTC market cap? I just don’t understand what do you have in mind and your insulting posts are not helping to understand your plan at all.

Also what if someone start dumping? Are you going to buy all coins? Where do you find money for it? Are you going to control all exchanges? How is that decentrilized in any way?

So now we don't even have 0.04% but only 0.04% over time. Well played.

What I understand is that the initial supply will still be 400 million at launch. So us early investors will still have a relatively large share of Simcoin at the start. This share will get diluted over time, so I don't really see the problem if you sell early.

In case the 400 million gets released gradually we will suffer some share dilution, but only a small amount since the 1 trillion also will get distributed gradually. This can take years, or even decades. So plenty of time to take some profit.

It doesn't make sense if only a few people hodl most coins of a cryptocurrency. What you want is proper distribution and real life usage. It seems the majority of the people in crypto now are greedy traders who only care about making as much money as possible. This should change and it will change. Maybe adding a trillion of new coins doesn't help the greedy trader now, but later it might help the people who will actually use it as a medium of exchange.

Our shares would be diluted with 1B of new coins or 10B. With 1T coins they’ll be vanished.

Again, one should be absolute idiot to buy into coin that has 10 thousand percent inflation a year. Nobody would buy it or want something to do with it. With my prevoius ICOs I sometimes was buying more coins after the release if I saw a potential, but with such conditions I myself won’t buy anything. What does it say about the coin if initial investors are not buying any on the release?